click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121129
20121207
STATION
MSNBCW 23
CSPAN 11
CNNW 6
CSPAN2 2
LANGUAGE
English 45
Search Results 0 to 44 of about 45 (some duplicates have been removed)
the long term effects of our deficit, which are directly tied to health care -- the work that has been done in the congress as it relates to constructing and exchange that will take place in 2014 and go into effect, and the tools that we provided a initially on a concept that by its very nature was one designed by republicans, that there is ample room for us to tackle the unbelievable rise in cost of health care to 17% of our gross domestic product by focusing on dropping those costs. most recently the president of aetna said very clearly -- not only if we drop those costs would we make health care more affordable, we would also deal with balancing our national debt. so these are all very constructive areas that we all should agree to. that the american public wants us to pursue. we remain optimistic because of the way the president has gone out there and is selling this concept, not only in white house public. i commend leader boehner, speaker boehner, setting the appropriate tone in the conference. we know there are differences in both the caucus and the conference, but it is the common t
political adviser indicated that medicare and medicaid are the main drivers of our deficit. i know we have seen this morning also several editorial writers indicate the same, that it is important that we put these drivers of the deficit on the table and include them as part of any agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff. as the speaker said, we have done our part. we have put revenues on the table, something we did not do two years ago during the debt ceiling negotiation. we still believe that it is most important for us to address the economic situation in this country where so many people are out of work. that is why we take the position and believe strongly that increase in marginal rates i, income-tax rates, is not the way to produce growth and put people back to work. but we have not seen any good faith effort on the part of its administration to talk about the real problem that we're trying to fix. i am told mr. bowles, some of us will meet with him later today, said earlier this morning there has been no serious discussion by the white house on entitlements, on medicare and medicaid. th
street greed in the form of a $6 trillion housing bubble. this brought large budget deficits. some at the center of the housing crash are pushing to deep cuts to social programs to cure the budget deficit. the c.e.o. of goldman sachs, who received a $10 billion direct bailout at below market interest rates have preached about decreasing social security benefits and increasing the retirement age. main street americans have lost more than 40% of their wealth from 2007 to 2010. nearly one in six u.s. residents is officially poor, the highest rate in 50 years. 22% of american children live in poverty. we're facing an economic situation that resembles the years leading up to the great depression. now, this prevailing budget plan calls for deep cuts, environmental protection, social security, medicare, medicaid. well, corporations and the top 1% get tax cuts of nearly $3 trillion over the next decade. this is not how you protect a democracy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: i ask unanimous
this morning. you made a comment that you did not believe anybody was interested in solving this deficit problem. that about knocked me out of my chair. i need you to explain to me and the rest of the people watching why you said that anthony g. to -- and i need you to expound on that. i will take my answer off the air. please ask mr. reid to not to be such an obstructionist and sit down and listen. have a great day. guest: imitate a few days for that message out to get through from me. there's a lot of concern about budget deficits. in the period after the downturn, budget deficits for in a range of 10% of the entire gdp, the entire economic output of the u.s. they have come down a little bit. economists think to be sustainable, budget deficits have to be in the range of 3% of economic output or a lower. the focus of this effort to reduce deficits now is on getting them, in the federal budget deficit to the range of 3% or so. that is what i mean when i say policymakers are not trying to get rid of the budget deficits. given the economic weakness, a little bit of deficit spending is pro
that bill clinton generated for the george w. bush administration, and turned it into a huge deficit. >> eliot: yes, look, that is a perfect articulation of what has happened over the past 20 years economically. david stockman is still telling the truth about what the true intent was all the way through. quickly, fix the deficit co-alation trying to use what they're creating, the emotional crisis they're creating, and in argument to lower their own corporate taxes once again. does that make sense to you? >> big corporations are sitting on almost 2 trillion-dollar of cash they don't know what to do with. the idea that they some how need more cash is absurd. the ceos, what they want for themselves instead of $8 million or $10 million in cash or in compensation they like more compensation. it has nothing to do with the welfare of the economy over all. >> eliot: former u.s. labor secretary robert reich and my nominee for u.s. treasure secretary, "beyond outrage" robert reich as always, thanks. >> thanks, eliot. >> eliot: turning to weather the prediction calls for cats. viewfinder. [ mal
and screaming that can't be part of it, yet all of them privately will tell you what's driving the deficit more than any single thing of medicare and medicaid and longer-term social security, so the mere fact that we are discussing those types of things fit. in terms of the votes, look, if it's going to be a deal there has to be votes from both sides. the reality is -- and these guys, the president and the speaker dealt with one another before. they've never been able to come to a deal. they came to a huge deal during the lame-duck session in 2010 on extending the bush tax cuts. they came to another deal without shutting down the government in april of 2011 cutting discretionary spending by billions of dollars and they came to another one on the debt ceiling as well which was a 2.2 trillion dollar long-term reduction in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling. so, you know, the need to take it to another level. this is a more complex problem, and it's the beginning of a series of negotiations between the two. they are going to be together for the next four years. the president won the elec
to reduce the deficit, 63% said no. 86% of the ads run for obama were personal attacks on romney. he won a stunning mandate to not be romney. he did not run on the basis he was going to do massive new spending and the kind of tax increases, $1.6 trillion that he's now talking about. and at the same time that obama was elected president, the republican house, which had twice voted for a real budget -- remember, the president's budget he claims he has a mandate for was put up before the house and the democrats all voted against it. in the senate, the democrats didn't want to have anything to do with it. it's a little hard to argue, he had a mandate for something the rest of his party ran away from. >> well -- >> did not run ads on those issues. >> and, of course, it was a bit more complicated than that. but to your point about the exit polls, it's true, most people said that they didn't want tax increases to solve the deficit. what they said -- the majority, was they wanted both balanced. they wanted cuts and tax increases. which is what both john boehner and the president -- in very strid
with the president and other ceo's to discuss the impending crisis. we even published their own study on the deficit, copies of which are available here today. we look forward to continuing this conversation, keeping the dialogue on going for the next month is critical if we're going to solve this problem -- and we think our panel will be very enlightening in terms of what the issues are. so, al, with that i will turn it over to you and the panel. we look forward to reproductive hour. thank you very much. >> can everybody hear? i welcome you all to bgov -- if you do not know as much about it as you want, i invite you to stay, because it really is a fabulous place. we do have an all-star panel. i will start with my left, which is where bob corker says i always start. tim pawlenty, former governor of minnesota. i wrote that i thought that if he could get the nomination he would have been the strongest republican presidential candidate. i was absolutely right -- we just could not figure out how to get there from here. tim is now the head of the financial services round table, a job he took just about a
, we have seen record deficits and a record debt accumulate, and yet he keeps demanding that we raise taxes to pay for more spending. this will only hurt our economy. ernst and young has done an analysis of the president's proposal and said it will cost several hundreds thousands of jobs. there is a better way and the speaker has laid it out. it is an approach that calls for tax reform by reforming the tax code and passing responsible spending cuts in order to get our fiscal house in order. that's what america wants. this is our opportunity to do the big things. this is our moment to provide that leadership that america desperately wants and we stand here ready to take the action necessary. >> the american people are hurting right now and now is the moment where we need to step up to the plate and solve the problem. i don't know how any of us can look our kids and grandkids in the eye and explain to them that we aren't willing to pay for the things we are enjoying today but just going to send them the bill. that's why republicans have the proposal on the table that fixes the problem,
is to go over the fiscal cliff. it maximizing the deficit reduction. there's no deal cut between republicans and democrats. it's not going to reduce the amount of money coming out of the deficit by a lot. so if you do that, you go back to the clinton tax rates, cut some defense and we have a short, mild recession for two quarters. we have to get serious about the deficit e. i have no belief that the congress is going to get serious about the deficit. so tom cole was right because he wants to get the republicans back in the mainstream. but the best thing the country could do is go over the cliff. >> timothy geithner doesn't agree with you on that. >> he may or may not. but i looked at this a lot of ways. the people inside washington are awfully smart and awfully out of touch. we need to do something about the deficit. going over the fiscal cliff is the best thing we're going to get out of washington in terms of serious production to the deficit. we will suffer, but we got ourselves into this. we're not going to get out without some pain. i think we are going to go over the cliff.
of payments deficit remains petroleum, and to increase our g.d.p. by the maximization of these activities in the united states rather than exporting our dollars abroad. so thank you very much and i think we can sit down now or -- yeah. >> thank you. give us a moment to take our seats. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, our panel discussion is about to begin, featuring senator lamar alexander, senator roy blunt, and our moderator, christine romans. >> can you hear me now? there we go. good morning, rn. -- all right. so i'm a lazy moderator. i've warned everyone. we want to get the ball rolling and talk about this report, talk about the future of energy in this country, and the future of transportation and america's national security with regards to energy. but i want to make sure that all of you know to please jump in. i don't want to ask a question and then ask another question. i want this to be a discussion, and i'll steer it. everyone agree? do we all agree? wonderful. let me start first with fred. nice to see you again. >> good to see you. >> you've heard the findings of the report,
the white house in 1988. but just two years later, the reagan deficits were skyrocketing and president bush was forced to change his most famous line. >> long and bitter battle over the budget officially ended last night. president bush put his signature on the deficit reduction package, including $140 billion in tax increases. >> tax increases. that was a turning point for the modern republican party. the right wing went crazy. and george bush lost re-election. since then the party's been committed to never compromising on the tax issue, no matter the deficit. no congressional republican has voted for an increase in taxes since 1990. think about it. for nearly a quarter of a century, no new income taxes. in the current congress, 236 house republicans vowed never to raise taxes. 40 gop senators also kept that pledge. even president george w. bush, the man who got us into two wars we didn't pay for. the president who exploded our deficit. he insisted the solution to our problems were more tax cuts. president clinton handed him a $236 billion surplus. a surplus. and left office with a $1.2 tr
, a lot of the other issues surrounding deficit reduction are going to be a whole lot easier. if we get this wrong, the economy is going to go south. we don't have a lot of time here. we have a few weeks to get this thing done. we could get it done tomorrow. optimistically, i don't think we are going to get it done tomorrow. >> the white house is using all social media resources to get the message out and put pressure on the republicans. >> today, i'm asking congress to listen to the people who sent us here to serve. i'm asking americans all across the country to make your voice heard. tell members of congress what a $2,000 tax hike would mean to you. call your members of congress, write them an e-mail, post it on their facebook walls. you can tweet it using the hash tag my 2 k, not y2 k. >> the president was laughing about you the strategy, seriously effective. the my2k was one of the top trends on twitter all day long. republicans aren't too happy. they are getting outflanked. >> if the president wants to reach an agreement, he needs to be talking with the members of his own party rig
of 2013-type solution. but the reality of dealing with this economy, its debt, it's deficit, spending priorities and all of that is not going to get done in the next five weeks. so let's be honest about that. i agree with you. i think that they're going to come to a short-term stopgap solution that deals with the cliff, that deals with the bush tax cuts that expire, that deal with the increase in unemployment rate that's due to hit in january. they'll deal with those short-term things, but the long-term systemic substantive points that need to be addressed will not get addressed in the next four weeks. >> steve, how would you markets respond if they decide we'll have a short-term fix but we haven't actually managed to come up with the real healthy response to what the economy needs? >> you're seeing a total kick the can. we really got nothing done this december, tough luck, we just want to extend it six months, i think the markets would be jittery but would probably accept it. going over the cliff -- and we were talking about this the other night in washington with a bunch of ceos," g
? >> because it's not really kind of a huge driver of the deficit we're talking about right now. it's really the health care programs. but i think if you just pull back and make it really simple for a second, what you see are the democrats are saying, wait a second. increasing taxes a little bit on the rich or significantly on the rich, however you want to look at it, is pretty popular with the public or at least has broad public support. cutting entitlements is not very popular. it could be the right thing to do. perhaps there's a way to do it. but it's not very popular. you're asking us to not do the thing and say that you want to help us do the thing that is popular. and you want us the democrats to go on the table and lay out the details of the thing that is really unpopular. are you crazy? >> your short answer is no, we will not get any significant entitlement reform? >> not now. i think what the democrats want to do is kind of box those tax hikes up and get them agreed to in principle. kind of break the republicans' back a little on that. then, okay, maybe we can have a discussion on e
adds so much to the federal budget deficit. so republicans say raise the retirement age to 67 or means testing, meaning making more wealthy americans pay more into the system or get less out of the system. if you means test, that means you're paying less out to affluent americans. if you raise the retirement age, you're paying out less as money comes in and keeping the revenue line closer to the cost line. that is the goal. so when you do a 10 or 20-year calculation, medicare is not adding to the deficit. but that's the policy and just as republicans are having a backlash against the speaker saying we don't think we should put tax increases on the table, the democrats and some of the new members in congress, they say they ran promising not to touch medicare. so they say they won't do this. so you have the credibility challenge. republicans say give us entitlement and other spending cuts and the democrats want higher tax rates. that's why we have a stalemate. >>> an internet icon wanted in connection with the killing of his neighbor. stay with us, you're in "the situation room." that of
could not print money, we would be in a very bad way. i just think we need to get this deficit under control. those two wars that we have not paid for need to be paid for. you know, it has to be done. if going off the fiscal cliff means that it will be done, so be it. host: other groups are weighing in on these fiscal cliff talks. here is "the new york times" -- in the "financial times" this morning -- roger altman writing today in "the financial times." president obama will be meeting with several governors today at the white house to talk about the fiscal cliff. they will be meeting this morning around 10:00 a.m. eastern time, and then the governors are slated to hold a news conference at around 11:30 a.m. eastern time. go to our website for more details. washington insiders tackle fiscal cliff policy solutions. the group will hold a roundtable discussion today on the importance of reform to address the nation's debt and deficit spending this event takes place this morning around 8:30 a.m. eastern time. go to our website for all our coverage of the fiscal cliff talks. we have a web
, congress realized that if they couldn't compromise on a deficit and revenue plan, our economy would crash. turns out they couldn't compromise. so here's what they did. in order to force themselves to work together and compromise, they concocted a catastrophic penalty that would itself crash our economy. brilliant. put it another way. if there is an asteroid headed towards the earth, we made it and fired it at ourselves. because otherwise we would never have done the hard work required to protect ourselves from asteroids. >> good morning. it's friday, november 30th. welcome to "morning joe." with us on set, we have msnbc political analyst and vice president and executive editor of msnbc.com, richard wolffe is here. >> he's here? >> my lord. right here on the set. political editor and white house correspondent for the huffington post, sam stein. >> hi. >> cute thing. and msnbc political analyst and visiting professor at nyu and former democratic congressman harold ford jr. >> good morning. >> good morning. >> he's reading. >> put that down right now. put the smut down. close it up. >> i'm l
. it is social deficits, executive function issues -- they can be put to work. if i may backtrack, because again we have heard about prevalence rates and the confusion of where these numbers come from. not once have i heard today the fact that the dsm iv, which constructs the criteria of who deserves a diagnosis, not once has anybody said that one of the reasons for expanding diagnosis was the expanding criteria to what needs a diagnosis. first off, the inclusion of asperger's, in 1994 opened up the book to a plethora of people including myself who never before would have qualified for an autism spectrum disorder, but even for traditional audits and the definition was changed. i may get these numbers wrong, but in the old book it was six mandatory criteria for a diagnosis of autism. if you got five but not six, back in those days it was mental retardation. now i believe it is eight optional out of a field of 16 possible criteria. that blows those numbers out of the water. >> i see my time is up. >> do you want to be recognized for a minute? mr. blaxill has a quick comment to be made? >> on the s
the deficit and restructure fiscal policy. so as eventually to bring the budget into balance. this framework must include tax reforms to raise more revenue, encourage growth and enhance progressivity. it must include parameters defining future levels of debt as a share of the gdp. and a date by which the budget will balance. and it must include changes to discretionary spending, entitlements as well as defense. our elected leaders should launch an expedited process to enact legislation that will construct this framework many 2013 -- in 2013, including powerful but appropriate default and enforcement mechanisms. without a recalibrated, sustainable fiscal policy, the united states' international standing will decline, and its national security will be undermined. such an outcome would be bad for the united states and, in our view, bad for the world. as pete said, he and i are joined here today with three, by three distinguished individuals. er is slams of america for -- servants of america for decades who made a difference, who had to come up with tough solutions to very complex problems. and
, but not as part of the process to reduce the deficit the country faces. >> there's a notion some republicans are for lack of a better word salivating at a possible it divide where you have some democrats who want no movement on entitlements and if there's any heat to be taken, it to come from the gop or go to the gop. >> let me just say a couple of things. first of all, what geithner was referring to is that social security shouldn't be on the table right now because it's not a driver of the deficit we're dealing with right now. he's referring to a separate process next year. what the republicans have asked for previously and i hope they're not going to continue to ask for is essentially the dismantling of medicare. we debated it during the presidential with paul ryan's proposal to put -- turn medicare into a voucher system. so when it comes to looking for savings in medicare, there's ways to find savings without breaking the guarantee that we've had to our seniors for the last several decades. i think democrats, again, have demonstrated repeatedly that we're willing to compromise, but the r
, that another really important part of this conversation in addition to long term deficit reduction is making sure that we get sustained economic recovery. we saw some good numbers today, but we want to make sure that we sustain that recovery. and extending middle class text cuts is part of it, but so is investing in our infrastructure, so are other elements of the president's jobs plan that should be part of this overall agreement. >> we have seen several liberal democrats to say that it is better to go off that cliff than to get a bad deal. and i'm wondering if you agree because it seems like the ceos who came out of the meeting with the president yesterday were most worried or at least seriously worried about the effect of not getting a deal on time and the effect that will have on the economy. >> we absolutely want to avoid going over the fiscal cliff because it would be a big drag on the economy. >> but are you willing to do that? >> what we're willing to do is come up with a package that both accelerates economic recovery, but also begins to reduce the long term deficit and the presiden
our bond rating to drop is the fact we're running unsustainable deficits and not dealing with our problem. that's exactly what the -- what the speaker is trying to get at. in terms of this issue, again, look, these are all people i like. these are people i agree with philosophically. i also want to do a good deal for the american taxpayer, including 98% of them. if we can take care of their issue -- i think we'll win the debate. i think they agree with us fundamentally that increases in taxes on anybody cost jobs. that's not good. but as long as it's owe their head their taxes might go up, i think they don't really have time to focus on that debate. again, i just think we ought to take that off. we agree with the president on that. but i respect the speaker. i support the speaker. >> we'll watch how this plays out. >>> joining me is democratic, barbara boxer wrote in politico today. we're looking there at a picture of, senator, of tip o'neill and reagan signing the bill. >> yes. >> on social security reform. you spoke about an earlier issue in your piece today about how they got t
, and their schools. i want to do this by bringing down our deficits in a balanced and responsible way. [applause] >> on this last point, you probably heard a lot of talk in washington and in the media about the deadlines that we're facing on jobs and taxes and investments. this is not some run-of-the-mill debate. this isn't about which political party can come out on top in negotiations. we've got important decisions to make that are going to have a real impact on businesses and families all across the country. our ultimate goal, our long-term goal is to get our long-term deficit under control in a way that is balanced and is fair. that would be good for businesses, for our economy, for future generations. and i believe both parties can and will work together in the coming weeks to get that done. we know how that gets done. we're going to have to raise a little more revenue. we've got to cut out spending we don't need, building on the trillion dollars of spending cuts we've already made. and if we combine those two things, we can create a path where america's paying its bills while still being a
a balanced approach to deficit reduction that doesn't hurt the economy and doesn't hurt middle class families. if we agree that we should not raise taxes on middle class families, let's begin our work with where we agree. >> of course there are some lawmakers who are not that optimistic. they don't think there's enough time between now and the end of the year to get a deal done. nonetheless the president will continue pushing his message. he heads to pennsylvania tomorrow. he will go to a manufacturing plant where he will continue talking about extending the middle class tax cuts, not extending them for the upper class americans. in the meantime, there's pushback from republicans who are saying the president should not be out the road campaigning but back here in washington negotiating. >> dan, i will ask you to look into your crystal ball. president obama is meeting with mitt romney later today. do you have any idea what they plan to discuss? >> you know, there's a lot of speculation about governor romney playing a role in the administration. but the president himself, during his victory spe
him for a long time, deficit hawk. they haven't allowed him to put a budget out for years. he's growing frustrated. i'm sure he's going to be glad to leave. but i was surprised by that as well. you see also, sam stein, republicans are now starting to really bash boehner from the right. the president needs to take note. he needs to take note. >> give him some running room. >> i'm only saying this because you remember, we went through this with newt. you know, bill clinton would push newt only so far, and then the conservatives in the caucus like myself and matt salmon, steve largent and others would say we're not doing a deal. we will take this place down. we're not doing a deal. and then newt would call bill clinton up and say, you're pushing me too far. you've got to work with me here. the same thing's happening right now with boehner. >> with boehner. >> the republican -- and when you start stripping people of committee -- committee seats, war breaks out and it gets really -- it happened with us. it's about to happen here. he's got to realize that boehner is his partner. >>
of any significant agreement will reduce our deficit. mr. bowles himself said yesterday there has been no serious discussion so far. there is a real danger of going off the fiscal cliff. going off the fiscal cliff will hurt our economy. it will cost american jobs. republicans have taken action to avert the fiscal cliff by passing legislation to stop all the tax hikes, to replace the sequester, and pave the way for tax reform and entitlement reform. we are the only ones with a balanced plan to protect the economy, protect american jobs, and protect the middle class from the fiscal cliff. without spending cuts and entitlement reform, it will be impossible to address our country's debt crisis and get our economy going again and to create jobs. right now all eyes are on the white house. the country does not need a victory lap. it needs leadership. it is time for the president and congressional democrats to tell the american people what spending cuts they're willing to make. with that, i will take a few questions. [indiscernible] >> it has been very clear over the last year and a half. i ha
out sensible spending cuts that must be part of any significant agreement that will reduce our deficit. >> the president has put forward in september of 2011 with his proposal to the so-called super committee and his budget of february of 2011 very specific spending cuts, including savings from health care entitlement programs. >> so one of the issues is, when you talk specifics and they become part of the public conversation, it's very easy for those things to get derailed in the time available where all the sides sort of clamber and attack some of the specifics. both parties have an interest in keeping some of this close to the vest. what we're hearing from senate democrats today is they believe that the election suggests that the public really wants those higher rates for the higher earners in terms of taxes. senator reid and other democrats don't want to talk about specific cuts or entitlement reforms publicly. everyone saying they don't want to negotiate from the podium. but everyone is aware it's the end of november. there isn't a lot of time left. and how quickly and how peacefu
anything on entitlements, would prefer frankly not to have to do anything on some of these debt and deficit problems. if you look at the numbers, then medicare in particular, will run out of money and we will not be able to sustain that program, no matter how much taxes go up. i mean it's not an option for us to just sit by and do nothing. >> that was president obama in the summer of 2011 speaking the hard truths about entitlements. it did not exactly play well for him then and he's been largely quiet on the issue since, perhaps because for both parties talk of cutting social security and medicare hurts a lot. >> there's a pain point that democrats have to reach as well. it's not just republicans. that both sides have to be able to get to the end of this things and say, yes, the president won re-election but there is nobody that gets away with this thing without feeling pain. >> and there are some on the left who hope to get through this without having to go under the knife. adam green, co-founder of the progressive change campaign says -- yesterday on abc's "this week" congressman keith el
shot down the theory of closing loopholes to cut the deficit saying it's exactly that. a theory. >> it is not possible for us to raise the amount of revenue that's required for a balanced package if all you're relying on is closing deductions and loopholes. it is possible to do theoretically. it is not possible or wise to do as a practical matter. >> the president then threw a left hook warning republicans who think they might be aim able to use the debt ceiling as leverage in future negotiations and saying essentially dream on. >> if congress in any way suggests that they're going to tie negotiations to debt ceiling votes and take us to the brink of default once again, as part of a budget negotiation, which by the way we have never done in our history until we did it last year, i will not play that game. because we've got to break that habit before it starts. >> joining me now from the capitol dome, nbc's luke russert. i don't know, i think that was what we call officially laying the smack down over there at the business roundtable. i was really surprised that the president wen
agreed we should have a balanced approach to deficit reduction that doesn't hurt the economy and doesn't hurt middle class families. if both parties agree we should not raise taxes on middle class families let's begin our work with where we agree. >> americans are concerned. but divided over the best solution to avoid the fiscal cliff. take a look at an abc news washington post poll that shows 60% of americans support upper income americans having their taxes raised. 37% oppose it. on issue of reducing deductions, 44% support that. 49% oppose it. much like lawmakers they realize there is a big problem that needs to be fixed but divided on how to fix it. >> in addition to the goings on in the capitol there is a big lunch at the white house today. governor romney coming by for a bite to eat. a lot of speculation about what might be discussed at the meal and the possibility of maybe future job? >> jay carney pushed back on that yesterday. the president said there was no suggestion here that he had a special assignment for him. the president invited mitt romney to come to the white house b
and deficit. but we are not talked about the investments that are needed in this country that will help make us stronger in the future. whether we're talking about education or job training or investment in our infrastructure or providing the services for our veterans when they come home or those kinds of things that we can't just continue to talk about cutting government. we have to have a country that actually is strong in the underpinnings and that is a balanced approach that i think we need to be taking. >> before we go, i swrus want to turn to one other piece of senate business, this oddity of susan rice. it's just a simple question about john mccain and lindsey graham and john mccain and lindsey graham, do you think they are crazy and you can answer yes or maybe. >> what i believe is that susan rice is an incredible person with a great deal of intelligence and integrity and n ought to be taken r for her word. i think it's really unfortunate for her. >> i don't think senators are crazy in my experience, so i've been theorizing this is about opening up the secretary of state job for john
path that only spending cuts will get them to deficit reduction, they can carry on believing that or get to a place where they're going to get re-elected. >> richard, i think the president is offering a great deal to the republicans. here's why. these guys can go home 98% and say, you know what, 98% of you, i got the tax cuts. i didn't raise your taxes. oh, by the way, my base, you wealthy folks over here, look what obama did to you. he raised your taxes. that's only going to infuriate the wealthy even more. the fact here is is that he has given them something they can campaign on plus they can turn around and say, these are his cuts to medicare, not ours. i don't now why they don't take this deal for the good of the country and come back and fight another day. >> to say democrats are not serious about entitlements, $400 billion of cuts to medicare is a cut to entitlements. that's going to mean hardship for seniors. that's a real cut. now, you can pretend like the hospitals are going to swallow all of that cost cut. they're not. they're going to pass that on. that means less
want them to cooperate whenever possible. they, republicans will come around on the deficit, because of the economic you know, cliff that we're hanging over. i think they'll do that. i don't think there's any doubt that the republicans will cooperate on immigration reform. they've learned how important the hispanic vote is and african-american vote. >> having gotten politics out of the way, the carters promptly returned to building, a work ethic that created marie's 175-square-foot home and something jimmy and roselynn carter say they'll forever do and like most things, do together. richard lui, msnbc, haiti. >>> grover norquist, the man in the middle, may be hit be the sidelines. but what about grover norquist has made hundreds march in lockstep behind him all these years? we'll talk about it. ♪ i'd like to thank eating right, whole grain, multigrain cheerios! mom, are those my jeans? [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios tend to weigh less than those who don't. is bigger than we think ... sometimelike
't the tax debate now blocking progress towards the larger issue which is getting -- attacking the deficit with real spending cuts? >> i think there is, but let me make very apparent i think the speaker is right. i think the proposal he's put on the table is a great proposal that we ought to not raise rates. there's other ways to get revenue that honestly are more economically productive in the long term. having said that, again, i think you might be better served to do this in pieces. first, we disagree with the democrats on a lot of things but we don't disagree about the 98% of the american people. we don't think their taxes should go up. to me since that's a point of agreement and doesn't affect either side's negotiating position on the other issues we ought to remove it from the table. make sure most americans don't have to worry about their taxes going up. having said that, again, i think the speaker's right on in terms of the proposal he's put out there. most importantly, he couples it with something the president doesn't, which is really significant spending cuts and entitlepment re
. but the other thing is remember this continued tax cut for the middle class is part of a deficit reduction package so the president is very much focused on getting rid of that debt and getting it off the backs of our kids but in the meantime, it is not necessary to raise tax rates on the middle class in order to get there. and if we did raise taxes on the middle class, it is not going to get us that far down the road. what will really get us down the road is getting back to the regular tax cuts, having the wealthiest of americans pay their fair share. letting the 2% go back up from 35% to 39% which they were under bill clinton. one final my2k story from doug up in vancouver washington. what do you say? >> caller: hey bill. let me put my bong down real quick here. [ laughter ] >> caller: you know, there is a certain bunch of us here that think that they're going to get us on entitlement. that's all they keep talking about. nobody's mentioning the military. so i'm with the other caller, the gal before that said let's go over t
Search Results 0 to 44 of about 45 (some duplicates have been removed)